Obama: Red Line? Not My Red Line!

On August 20, 2012, President Obama first uttered his now infamous “red line” comment regarding use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Civil War:

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.

While some in the MSM recently tried to walk those statements back for him, the practical implication of a “red line” means that chemical weapon use changes the game. Regardless of the intention of those words, the administration has been acting like a “red line” means American intervention and that Assad had crossed this perilous Rubicon of calculus equations.

So, I guess Obama is saying that he clearly meant that his “red line” was one set by the world and Congress decades ago. Really? By implication, then, if you don’t support him you’re opposing 98% of the world? Hmm… seems to be kind of the other way around lately.

Note to world: Don’t worry, he uses this kind of divisive blather against his opponents all the time. Just ignore him — he’s just grumpy that it’s your fault he can’t get a coalition to intervene in Syria.

Truth be told, that “red line” comment was probably a throwaway line used to make the Vulcan look tough during last year’s campaign. However, words means things — he’s getting a lesson that “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for” only works with the MSM against Republicans. Regardless, this annoyed response to the press today looks small and is highly embarrassing.